User:HYang2024/Inclusive design/Carlikelley Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

HYang2024


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:HYang2024/Inclusive design


 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Inclusive design

Evaluate the drafted changes
It's clear that your article is very much still a work in progress, so I'm just reviewing based on what you have so far and where you appear to be taking it based on your notes/missing information.

The introduction is particularly strong. You provide a clear first sentence introducing what inclusive design is, then dive into a more detailed overview of its history and basic principles. It's clear, informative, and concise, and doesn't reveal too much about the more detailed information that follows it throughout the rest of the article. Great job on that.

The information throughout the rest of the article was also great. It's overall very informative, and I definitely feel like I have a good understanding of what inclusive design is after reading it. Obviously you are still adding to it, and I would assume that the History section is one that you plan on developing more since it's pretty short right now. Once that's done I think you'll have a really good basic framework for the article. If you can find reliable sources of related information, one topic I would suggest considering adding would be a section on notable people/organizations who are related to inclusive design in some way. They've benefitted from it, advocated for it, employed it themselves, etc. I think this will provide context for readers about the relevance of inclusive design.

One thing I noticed that could use a little improvement is linking related articles. There are several things you referenced that I'm sure have Wikipedia articles written about them and thus should be linked in your article (i.e. Ronald Mace, UK Commission for Architecture and Built Environment, UK Design Council, University of Cambridge, Inclusive Design Toolkit, Microsoft, many in the Examples of Inclusive Design section, etc.). I also noticed a few minor spelling and grammatical errors, but I assume those would be accounted for as you polish your final draft.

Overall, it looks very well done so far and is definitely headed in the right direction. The information is neutral, accurate, and presented well, and the sources look good. Once you tune-up a few last-minute details, I think you'll have yourselves a really great article.

Carlikelley (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)